SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(AP) 254

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : V.V.S.RAO
Veeramallayyagari V.Sitaram - Appellant
Versus
Payala Chandrasekhar, Minor Guardian Payala Siddaiah - Respondent
Decided On : 03-13-01

Headnote:1) Will - Validity of - Plea of fraud - propounder of will to remove suspicion regarding fraud or undue influence and to satisfy the test of Judicial conscience

       2) Hindu Law - Mitakshara Law - A male Hindu inherits property by birth from his father, grand-father or great grand-father

       Held :Great grandsons acquire an interest in the ancestral propety by birth As between the son and the father, they have equal interest in the ancestral property and the son s interest is independent of his father s interest Such property is divisible as it is alwayas equated with copar cenary property

V. V. S. RAO, J.

( 1 ) IN the Appeal Suit as well as Transferred Appeal suits, the appellants are aggrieved by the common judgment and the decrees dated 11. 11. 1981 in four different suits. It is convenient to dispose of all the four appeals by this common Judgment.

( 2 ) A. S. NO. 3025 of 1982 (which may be treated as main appeal) arises against the judgment and decree in O. S. No. l of 1977 (which is the main suit) on the file of the court of Subordinate Judge, Madanapalle and Tr. Appeal Nos. 3519, 3520 and 3521 of 1985 arise against O. S. Nos. 32 of 1978, 30 of 1978 and 32 of 1978 respectively on the file of the said Court. All the four suits are concerned with all or some of the items of the properties owned by one Payala kondappa (also described as kondaiah) of somula village near Madanapalle, Chittoor district. The items of properties include dry lands, wet lands as well as house site. All the parties in all the suits are closely related either by birth in the same family or by marriage. During the pendency of the suits. Kondappa died. His second wife Mallamma who is the first plaintiff in the main suit also died. The death of these two has given scope to the learned counsel for the parties to raise new grounds which were not pleaded, proved or raised before the trial Court properly nor raised in these appeals.

( 3 ) BE that as it may, before noticing the pleadings, it is convenient to notice the relationship of the parties. One Payala kondaiah had some agricultural properties viz. coconut, mango, lemon and beetle leaf plantations in Somula village. He had two sons - Payala Kondappa and Payala siddappa. The brothers lived jointly and even jointly purchased some properties after the death of their father. Kondappa married one Atchamma and through her he had a daughter by name Parvatamma. After the death of Atchamma, Kondappa married mallamma and through Mallamma he begot chandrasekhar and Reddemma. The marriages of the daughters - Parvatamma and Reddemma - were performed. Reddemma was given in marriage to one veeramallaiahgari Sitaram. The younger brother of Kondappa viz. , Siddappa had two sons by name Sitaramaiah and kodandaramaiah. Payala Mallamma and her son chandrasekhar filed suit for partition being o. S. No. 1 of 1977 adding Kondappa (Dl ). Sitaram (D2 ). Seetharamaiah (D3 ). Kodandaramaiah (D4), Parvatamma (D5) and reddemma (D6 ). Sitaram filed a suit being o. S. No. 757 of 1976 on the file of the principal District Munsif, Punganur which was later transferred and numbered as o. S. No. 103 of 1978 on the file of the subordinate Judge s Court, Madanapalle. This suit is for perpetual injunction restraining Kondappa from interfering with the possession of the lands, which were allegedly demised to Sitaram under a registered lease deed dated 29. 3. 1976. The third suit 0 S. No 30 of 1978 by Kondappa against Sitaram and his brother krishnamurthy is for cancellation of the lease deed made in respect of items 3 to 10 of the suit schedule properties and a sale deed dated 27-3-1976 in respect of item no. 2 which is a house site, on the ground of fraud and misrepresentation. The fourth suit i. e. O. S. No. 32 of 1980 is filed by reddemma, the daughter of Kondappa through his second wife for partition of l/6th share in all the properties left behind by Kondappa.

( 4 ) THE parties shall be referred to as they are arrayed in O. S No 1 of 1977. In a. S. No. 3025 of 1982, Tr. A. S. Nos. 3520 of 200116) ALD Nov. 1" 1985 and 3521 of 1985. Sitaram is the appellant who is the second defendant in o. S. No. lof 1977. Whereas Reddemma sixth defendant in O. S No. l of 1977 filed tr. A. S. No. 3519of 1985. Pleadings in A. S. No. 3025 of 1982:

( 5 ) IN the suit O. S. No. l of 1977 mallamma, the plaintiff and minor plaintiff. Chandrasekhar pleaded as follows. The plaint schedule properties, items 3 to 9 (agricultural properties) item No 1 (house) item 2 (house site admeasuring 4 1/2 cts.) are joint and undivided properties of kondappa, the































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top